To what extent was the 14th amendment a betrayal?

Question

As well...As significant as the 14th amendment is, it represented a major betrayal to one group who had been very active in social movements in the 1840s and 1850s, who was this group?

Answer 1

The answer is obviously intended to be "women".

But this is a rather odd question, especially the choice of the words "major betrayal", which suggests something withheld by deception and/or the breaking of a promise. I do not see such a promise being made, nor any deception at work. And once you look at the circumstances that led to the passage of the 14th and 15th amendments, what actually took place is even more understandable.

One oddity is that the questioner chose the FOURTEENTH amendment (more on that below). It would make better sense if asked about the FIFTEENTH amendment, the one that guaranteed black males the right to vote, while women, who had indeed done much in the fight for abolition (and in many other causes) were not granted that right for another half century.

Or, I should say, were not given it at the FEDERAL level for that long. In fact, many STATES allowed women to vote (that is, in all but federal elections) long before that (beginning in Wyoming, I believe, in the 1870s). And on the national level, you even find a discussion of the possibility in the Republican platform of 1876.

Also, to gain a LITTLE historical perspective, note that though black males had the CONSTITUTIONAL right, many were unable to exercise it, due to all sorts of Southern white maneuvers, from intimidations and lynching in the early days, to poll-taxes and grandfather clauses. So to say that they could exercise a right women did not yet have is, in many cases, almost meaningless. And in many OTHER respects, their rights were much LESS respected.

That brings me to the FOURTEENTH Amendment and its background.

In some respects this amendment was an official disavowal of Roger Taney's opinion in the Dred Scott decision. He had declared that, though states might be free to allow blacks various rights as citizens of the state, the Constitution's authors did NOT think of them as citizens of the nation, and so they WERE not... and thus had NONE of the rights of a U.S. citizen. (That included the right to sue in federal court -- which led Taney to say that Scott did not even have the right to BRING his case to the Supreme Court!)

Women, on the other hand, WERE considered citizens of the nation and DID enjoy a number of these rights. In other words, blacks had a NEED for the FOURTEENTH amendment in a way women did not.

Then there are the IMMEDIATE reasons for this amendment. As the 13th amendment was being ratified in 1865 Andrew Johnson was allowing Confederate states to rejoin the Union on very light terms. These included accepted of that amendment, BUT he encouraged a "minimalist" interpretation which ended slavery but did NOTHING to protect violation of all sorts of ordinary rights of the newly freed.

As a result, Southern states felt free to pass "black codes" with very heavy restrictions on blacks, in some respects not much different from slavery, including allowing them to easily be jailed (and thenced forced to work as prisoners!) if they didn't abide by the states' work laws.

Northern ANGER over this, and the determination to correct it was what led to the next two amendments -- the 14th (among other things) declaring blacks CITIZENS with full rights of citizenship the 15th granting them the right to vote.

Note too that the granting of the franchise to black males (in the FIFTEENTH amendment) was ALSO seen as necessary to give THEM some power to safeguard their own basic civil rights. Without any say in the government it would be all too easy for their rights to be ignored by the white governments of these states -- with "black code" type results.

Another factor in the push to grant the franchise to black males was the contribution of some 180,000 of their number to the Union army. (Not in any way to belittle contributions and sacrifice from women, but it is not difficult to see how fighting and suffering death or serious wounds in battle would make a stronger impression.)

Now it is altogether reasonable to argue that women deserved protection of their interests. But by a comparison of their circumstances --esp. the abuse and quasi-slavery recently freed blacks were easily subjected to-- it is not that difficult to understand why this was a more pressing concern.

Answer 2

women human beings did no longer get the perfect suited to vote. women human beings were very energetic interior the abolitionist circulation, yet, the those that they helped to set unfastened(the male a million/2 of them) have been given the perfect suited to vote, on a similar time as women human beings of all colorations had to attend yet another 60 years or so.

Answer 3

Wow, Thankss! Just what I was searching for. I looked for the answers on the internet but I couldn't find them.

Answer 4

Women were excluded from many of the rights of citizenship.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/jul28.html

Answer 5

I was wondering much the same question